Cauldwell v. Neilson
Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County
1Opinion of the Court
Bakratt, P. J.,
This is a rule for more specific statement; action in trespass for alienation of affections.
The defendant contends:
1. That the statement joins actions for slander and for alienation of affections.
This objection to the statement is untenable. The statement bases its claim wholly upon the defendant alienating the affections of plaintiff’s husband.
2. That the averments of the statement are vague, indistinct and insufficiently clear to enable the defendant to join issue.
This objection also is untenable. The statement distinctly avers that the defendant alienated the affections of…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Williams v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Colorado · 1894
- French v. DeaneSupreme Court of Colorado · 1894
- Higham v. VanosdolIndiana Supreme Court · 1885
- Wales v. MinerIndiana Supreme Court · 1883
- Jonas v. HirshburgIndiana Court of Appeals · 1897
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.